We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
This paper is an attempt to offer a functional theory of the mass media, and to suggest criteria for evaluating the media which emerge from it—criteria which are not taken from other disciplines or from the technology of the media. First, the present stage of communications research is considered; second, the contributions of Marx and Freud; and third, an alternative hypothesis is suggested.
Urban sociologists ought to be parties to any discussion of the mass media, for it is difficult to imagine anything more symbolically urban than the mass circulation daily newspaper, the car radio, or the TV antenna. Yet judging from books on urban sociology interest in this aspect of urban life has, in recent years, dwindled to almost nothing. Neglect here is matched by the peculiar evasion in communications research of the urban context. Comparisons are routinely made between rural and urban populations with respect to readership, audiences and programme preferences, but these tabulations are not weighted any differently from comparisons along such dimensions as marital status, sex, education, and others in our standard repertoire. The two bodies of knowledge, then, have developed independently of each other despite the common-sense observation that they are inextricably related.
Presented to the Conference of Learned Societies on June 10, 1961 in Montreal.
1 Berelson, Bemard, “The State of Communication Research,” Public Opinion Quarterly, XXIII, no. 1, spring, 1959, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Lazarsfeld, Paul F., Berelson, Bernard and Gaudet, Hazel, The People's Choice (New York, 1948).Google Scholar
3 Kriesberg, Martin, “Cross-Pressures and Attitudes: A Study of the Influence of Conflicting Propaganda on Opinions Regarding American-Soviet Relations,” Public Opinion Quarterly, XIII, no. 1, spring, 1949, 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 Mead, George H., Mind, Self and Society (Chicago, 1933).Google Scholar
5 Cooley, C. H., Human Nature and the Social Order (New York, 1902).Google Scholar
6 Sapir, Edward, “Communication,” Encyclopedia of Social Science, IV (New York, 1931).Google Scholar
7 Hyman, Herbert H., Political Socialization (Glencoe, Ill., 1959).Google Scholar
8 Mannheim, Karl, Ideology and Utopia (New York, 1940).Google Scholar
9 Durkheim, Emile, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (Glencoe, Ill., 1947).Google Scholar
10 Veblen, Thorstein, The Higher Learning in America (New York, 1918).Google Scholar
11 Hoggart, Richard, The Uses of Literacy (London, 1957).Google Scholar
12 Malraux, André, “Art, Popular Art, and the Illusion of the Folk,” Partisan Review, XVIII, no. 5, 487–95.Google Scholar
13 Freud, Sigmund, The Future of an Illusion (New York, 1949), 77.Google Scholar
14 New York, 1951.
15 Jones, Ernest, Hamlet and Oedipus (New York, 1954).Google Scholar
16 Lasswell, Harold D., Psychopathology and Politics (Chicago, 1930).Google Scholar
17 Cooper, Eunice and Jahoda, Marie, “The Evasion of Propaganda,” Journal of Psychology, XXIII, 01, 1947, 15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18 Farge, Christopher La, “Mickey Spillane and His Bloody Hammer,” Saturday Review, 11 6, 1954.Google Scholar
19 Rolo, Charles J., “Simenon and Spillane: The Metaphysics of Murder for the Millions,” in Rosenberg, Bernard and White, David Manning, eds., Mass Culture (Glencoe, Ill. 1960), 165–75.Google Scholar
20 Merton, Robert K., Mass Persuasion (New York, 1946).Google Scholar
21 Glynn, Eugene David, “Television and the American Character—A Psychiatrist Looks at Television,” in Elliott, William Y., Television's Impact On American Culture (East Lansing, Mich., ed., 1956).Google Scholar
22 Fiedler, Leslie A., “The Middle Against Both Ends,” in Rosenberg, Bernard and White, David Manning, eds., Mass Culture (Glencoe, Ill., 1960), 537–47.Google Scholar
23 Arnheim, Rudolf, “The World of the Daytime Serial,” in Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and Stanton, Frank N., eds., Radio Research, 1942–1943 (New York, 1944).Google Scholar
24 Malinowski, Bronislaw, Magic, Science and Religion (New York, 1954).Google Scholar
25 Malraux, “Art, Popular Art, and the Illusion of the Folk.”
26 Wertham, Frederic C., Seduction of the Innocent (New York, 1954).Google Scholar
27 Klapper, Joseph T., Children and Television: A Review of Socially Prevalent Concerns (New York, 1948).Google Scholar
28 Maccoby, Eleanor E., “Television: Its Impact on School Children,” Public Opinion Quarterly, XV, no. 3, 421–44.Google Scholar
29 Himmelweit, Hilde T., Oppenheim, A. N., and Vince, Pamela, Television and the Child (London and New York, 1958).Google Scholar
